Matt HartwellToday 04:14 pm JST
There is one key difference between CNN and Fox
CNN is losing ratings, Fox is gaining ratings.
The reason is quite simple: While Fox News is the only network delivering certain filtered, not being so careful with the truth, news for a certain audience expecting exactly that one sided view, CNN is competing with dozens of other networks that deliver balanced and reasonable information to the rest of the Americans and the world and therefore have to share the audience hence lower ratings.
Moreover CNN is not losing ratings as Fox News is not gaining, this varies from time to time, true is that the share of viewers of CNN is lower compared to Fox News because of the reason explained above.
I would imagine Fox News ratings drops by half if Trumpet News really started additionally to Fox News since the audience watching only this kind of news is a finite set.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
It is a sad development. How can you trust South Korea in any future international deals? 1965 agreement? Naw, today's topics were not covered by that treaty? What do you mean happened to the money paid back then? Huh... 2015 (voluntary) agreement, hmm, naw, let's redefine the meaning, I mean, we cannot give up that topic, it's so convenient for distracting from domestic political problems...
Also that statue thing, it's such a brilliant perfidious plan to keep the world to look at me. In trying to plant them around the globe, deceiving cities about the real meaning and purposely causing anger and problems aimed at Japan, even in other countries... It doesn't even stop there, the war about the name of the Sea of Japan is a similar scheming. The double standard is clear since the Yellow Sea or East China Sea are not threatend by calling it the West Sea or South Sea which they should, if the demand to call the Sea of Japan the East See, which is actually a double attack since the sea lays west of Japan.
Of course it is also a regrettable fact that South Korea denies the final settlement of the Liancourt Rock matter. Just let the ICJ decide like Japan proposed a couple of times and then no more arguing. I can think of only two things why South Korea does not agree to this, one is they know they are wrong and will lose those islands or two, they just want this case to continue forever and we're back at the beginning of my post. Both reasons are despicable but reflect the continuing behavor.
I wonder if this is also a result of the filtered media in SK. Almost total censorship of Japanese media was going on for decades and even today I think Japanese music or drama series are not allowed on the common to receive terrestrial channels.
It would be - actually it is - time South Korea moves forward and does not live in eternal bitterness about Japan. Japan could actually do a bit more in its treatment of her historic role but people of Korea, please don't get stuck in the past always digging up the same stuff you just burried before, it's useless work. Go ahead, embrace the future, don't exaggerate and forgive, just don't forget. Fortunately not all Koreas are so reactionary and many are really friendly, it's as it is often the case the politics which interferes.
Oh, talking about that politics and money, just pay it back if you don't care about international treaties and stop acting duplicitous.
11 ( +12 / -1 )
Your comparison to SK fails considering SK basically had nothing to lose. One plays much freer in such a case. Germany on the other hand had to watch their fair game play since it might have been a tie breaker to Sweden. How about you research how many fouls SK committed and how much GER or JP. In the group phase it's all about advancing and knowing the rules helps.
A rather more shameful game was between France and Denmark. By keeping it a tie, both teams advanced. No team really made any efforts.
Now, here Japan decided to rely on the other game instead of risking another goal by Poland. They tried during the match but like SK vs GER, if you have nothing to lose, you play much freer. JP decided not to risk it. It was the right decision for the last few minutes since Japan advances. I feel rather sad for those who cannot share the happiness of the team.
-3 ( +10 / -13 )
Although disputed, whoever controls the islands has a certain obligation for the people living there. Criticicing Russia for doing so is just a hasty, not thought through reaction. The topic "disputed or not" deserves another discussion. Nevertheless fact is, that no other country having an island dispute with Japan wants the matter to be settled by the ICJ while Japan, to my knowledge, already declared to accept any ICJ verdict.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
So if the ROK claims the island of Honshu, would Japan accept the ROK challenge at the ICJ?
Maybe after asking SK to see a doctor about this claim they could say yes, for the fun of it. The Liancourt Rocks are officially disputed, anyone arguing otherwise is blind as a bat. SK is obviously scared of losing the case.
2 ( +5 / -3 )
In case you wonder about Japan's reaction: Japan is forced to do so if they don't want to lose entitlement on Takeshima. Both countries have their story but South Korea occupies the islands, Japan held back not to start a new war. Nevertheless the claim persists. If they don't renew this claim regularly, they could lose it.
Japan wants to have this matter settled by the ICJ but South Korea refrains to do so. In their oppinion there is no problem. Quite the contrary for SK, keeping up the situation is useful, since always pointing out the islands on commercials, weather forecasts, etc. Japan must react and this is what South Korea wants! It's a perfect way to deviate from domestic politics and aborad it looks like Japan is still the aggressor.
To my knowledge, Japan agreed on respecting an ICJ rule, so it's up to South Korea to finally finish this blame game: Accept Japan's offer to settle this by the ICJ. But do you want to?
6 ( +12 / -6 )
Why the missile wasn't shot down? I can think of various reasons:
1) The projected flight path indicated early, that the missile would not hit Japan. Rather if the missile actually was shot down, debris could've been hitting Japan soil.
2) The risk of failure (combined with the anticipated flight path). Just imagine, what a missed defense shot would cause in reputation of being able to defend Japan.
3) Simply no missile defense system available at that location.
4) The ballistic fligh path reached its peak (about 500 km in height) over Japan, being out of range for Patriot or THAAD defense systems, which reach a height of about 150 km).
I'm sure a defense missile would be launched if an attack is imminent to hit Japan.
4 ( +6 / -2 )
smithinjapan quote: "For the islands that belong to South Korea? They don't see any issue with them, so why would they go to a body that has no power, and which Japan refuses to go to on other island issues for the same reasons?"
Oh dear, a topic that has nothing to do with the article nor what OssanAmerica actually meant. Apparently you carry around a certain grudge on Japan but let me correct your words to actual politics:
Japan wants SKorea to agree on taking the Takeshima/Dokdo case to the ICJ. Japan affirmed it will accept the decision but SKorea doesn't want to. Gee, I wonder why since this could once and for all settle the dispute. The reason is simple: SKorea is quite aware it will lose this case so they won't allow this being decided by the ICJ.
China has a problem with the Senkaku Islands administered by Japan. Same here, Japan would agree on an ICJ decision but here it is China that needs to call the ICJ as a plaintiff. Gee, I wonder why they just don't do it, maybe they are also aware they'd lose the case?
For you it should be simple to understand that the plaintiff, who wants somehing, must call the ICJ but the defendant must agree on the call. To my knowledge, Japan would agree on all the island disputes being decided by the ICJ yet the other countries somehow refuse to.
4 ( +4 / -0 )
Lol, misunderstood the headline upon first reading (street reopend=another sinkhole).
0 ( +1 / -1 )
The track on which the accident happened is equipped with a security system that automatically stops trains running a red light or the like. Acording to the latest (unconfirmed) news, that system, which was checked just the week before, was turned off by a local traffic controller (and there are still rumors to why he did it). Nevertheless, the cause for the time being seems to be a human error:
Euronews: "The person responsible for signal changes apparently turned off an anti-collision system to perform a task manually. Known as the PZB 90, the system was installed on all German railtracks following a 2011 crash. This would usually force trains to brake in the event of a missed signal."
According to eye wittnesses on one of the trains, that train left a 2-way-track waiting spot earlier than usual without waiting for the (as well usual) opposite train. For the full truth we'll have to wait for the black boxes to be evaluated.
2 ( +2 / -0 )
@Moonraker Decent answer: If you read the participation guideline you would've seen that your suggestions wouldn't be accepted for examples 4, 5 and 6 on page 5 in the first place. Anyway, good luck everyone trying.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
I don't understand why japan is obligated to accept refugees. It's a sovereign nation. I believe it's their right to refuse asylum for refugees.
That's very easy to answer: Japan signed the Refugee Convention!
I guess the low acceptance rate - among other things also mentioned here - can be explained by Japan checking thoroughly the reason for seeking asylum and does not accept economic refugees.
I don't know how Japan deals with asylum seekers that have "lost" their IDs. This is a big issue in Europe since these people cannot be refused refugee status so easily. Often it's enough to claim to come from a country where checks on people's identity is hopeless, so these often are allowed to stay. Among the others, those cause big problems, authorities don't know where to put them anymore, even school's gymnasiums are used already to house them. In some areas even were talks about using empty apartments or (even furnished) vacation homes - privately owned. Another big concern and in some areas already a problem is the rising crime rate due to unthankful refugees (don't know ho else to put it), often comitted by (unaccompanied) minors that cannot even be charged. Of course the latter ones are a minority in the huge number of refugees, but those stick out and cause huge trouble for all.
In consideration of these conditions, Japan does a good job on strictly checking the trueness of a refugee applicant.
0 ( +9 / -9 )
Not only in Japan. Also in Europe there has been a baby formula shortage due to excessive buying of Chinese. E.g.: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/baby-food-shortage-europe-due-china-demand .
11 ( +11 / -0 )
Another suggestion of mine would be to leave the names to be used but give the original makers a certain "original" stamp that features the original product as the only original. This naming of products is a big thing within Europe, it's not because of the trade talks with America now. The US knows similar laws like for e.g. Tennessee Whisky.
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
According to http://www.mercer.com/qualityofliving
Asia Top 5 Cities1 Singapore (25th globally) 2 Tokyo, Japan (43rd globally) 3 Kobe, Japan (47th globally) 4 Yokohoma, Japan (49th globally) 5 Osaka, Japan (57th globally)
Interestingly the same numbers appear under the URL: http://www.mercer.com/articles/quality-of-living-survey-report-2011
3 ( +5 / -2 )
I think I'd like to comment on fw360's comment (also including some others):
Basically what you try to say in your post is that China did everything like other countries do and Japan is the aggressor.
Let's see, so ADIZes are unilaterally. Well, in some way they are, nevertheless when the US started dealing around with ADIZes, apparently they got into broad consultations with neighboring countries. Also it apparently was taken care, ADIZes did not overlap. Also apparently those US ADIZes basically applies only to commercial airplanes and even lets them fly through without notice when not entering sovereign airspace. If I'm not wrong, the Chinese ADIZ applies to all and everything flying there.
You see, already the Chinese ADIZ is somehow different from others. Let's continue:
Also, you try to make the overlapping of the Chinese ADIZ with others seem normal as Japan also did the same thing, as you mention by Japan expanding its ADIZ twice. True, but why. Important piece you don't explain: Basically Japan inheritet its ADIZ by the US after the war, it was expanded once, when the Okinawa-Ryūkyū islands came home to Japan and once more a tiny bit around the westernmost Japanese island to cover its own territory by the international agreed 12 miles zone plus a neglectible 2miles buffer zone. Taiwan, which was affected by this latter move, regretted this happening but somewhat accepted it since it was Japanese territory and its 12 miles zone to be covered.
You seem to have ties to the UN since you know those guys are laughing there, maybe you can get me more details on this topic - as I mentioned, I'm informed but not perfect in the history details.
The fun part with the Chinese ADIZ now is, that if a plane does not comply to the Chinese orders in the international airspace, military action might be taken in that declared ADIZ zone. Now unfortunately that zone covers the Senkakus, which are for more than a hundred years internationally accepted Japanese territory and therefore come along with sovereign Japanese airspace - in which China intends to use military force if their Chinese rules are not followed.
Could become somehow troublesome…
The finally mentioned "nationalization" of the islands was, again only to my knowledge, to prevent right wing groups of becoming the owner of the islands and start rising their flag there, if not more. In that way, the Japanese government tried to keep away from escalation.
The biggest (if not for many decades also the only) move of changing the status quo in that area was the establishment of the Chinese ADIZ with their rules and coordinates.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Those people who think Fukushima was not that bad should always be reminded, that 99% of the nuclear crap was blown out to the ocean. Japan should introduce another memorial day thanking the wind.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Looks like people blamed the DPJ to be responsible for the earthquake and the nuclear desaster. LPD makes it all go away.... sanzaru technique. People still fall for it.
5 ( +6 / -1 )
What where the safte ymeasures there? When was this service lift, aka dumbwaiter, last checked, especially for the security of people? How did the woman apparently got stuck in there? A little more information would be helpful to understand how this could happen and what can be done to avoid an accident like this in the future.
3 ( +5 / -2 )
To conclude I'd like to add that the article didn't explain everything.
The main problem here was that she has her place of residence in the EU. But she could not prove she bought the instrument within the EU or she paid the according tax when she brought the instrument the first time into the EU. She explained she forgot the papers at home.
The fact she uses it as her work instrument has nothing really to do with this. If she didn't have a place of residence in the EU, it would have been considered simply as carry on luggage for personal usage. Problem is the place of residence - like in other countries as well.
No traveller has to be afraid of (legal) things for personal use being confiscated during an EU tourist trip. But if you return to the country of your residence (EU acts as one country in this case), you must make sure to follow the rules of customs. There are many reality TV shows in many countries that follow customs officials, border patrols, etc. where this also is explained. Further exceptions apply but not important here.
I just was surprised after that long time this happened. Additionally I wonder why you don't hear anything from this case any more. What happened. It must still be going on - or was it maybe settled soon afterwards. Just a good summer slump bridge?
0 ( +0 / -0 )
Does JR really have that much spare cash to spend on this problem? I wish the company would consider using such funds to lower fares or improve service. Does anyone know how much JR spends on anti-suicide or other platform safety measures? If JR is spending more on cleaning up graffiti than platform safety improvements, then something is very, very wrong.
Much cash? 80 million Yen is peanuts for JR. Lower fares? For more than a decade JR East didn't raise their fares. How much cheaper would a single ticket become if those 80 millions were actually used for that? Just a hint: The ridership of JR East is around 6.169 billion per year... Also JR seems to spent quite a lot on "platform safety improvement", recently Yamanote line also gets those additional time taking platform gates for idiots that decide to jump in front of a train instead of boarding it!
The investment for anti graffiti is very well spent. Even decrepit stations look better without graffiti. In western countries, graffiti makes them look worse. Even school projects with real art graffiti to bring some really nice pictures to those kind of places are destroyed by pure vandalism of spraying on some letters. What is the point of destroying other people's property? Time to act before it gets worse. I like not vandalised overpaths, train stations, bridges, walls, etc. No graffiti also shows that there is still respect for each other. JR, fight the problem before it gets worse, thank you.
1 ( +1 / -0 )
Looks like this article is taken over by a Korean paper. Otherwise using terms like "Eastern Sea" oder referring to the islets as "Dokdo" would not make sense. Generally the islets tend to draw a much bigger emotion in Korea than in Japan. Japan keeps renewing claims to the islands to not lose any claims.
Meanwhile Korean international TV stations air advertisements to visit the islands (the Liancourt Rocks as I refer) for holidays. It seems, there is no intend of talks between the nations to settle this argument, rather Korea is being loud.
The simplest solution to settle the dispute would be to call the international court. So far, Korea does not want to do this. Why? If there is a legal claim, this could be settled there.
The US by the way do play a part about those islands. After WWII they explicitely did not give in Koreas claims to the islands and rather used it for their military purpose, taken from defeated Japan. The US after 50 years just do their best in keeping silent, they are a protective power on both countries.
A rather funny part in explaining some claims on some islands is the fact, that claims reach back centuries, although many things happend in between. Always the case in the Japanese disputed islands with neighboring countries. Maybe Rome should still have control of countries around the Mediterranean Sea, France over eastern Europe since Napolean, etc. often ridiculous arguments not up-to-date. If an island can be seen from somewhere else also is no argument, even Palin proved that with Russia. What's behind of this - except right wingers - Maritime law is a big factor about disputed islands, and claim for resources there. So go settle this with talks between each other and if not possible go to court! Let the international Court of Justice decide. Always better than war or neverneding disputes.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Japan so far was, considering the circumstances, really really lucky. The wind blew almost all of the radioactivity to the ocean. Any other wind direction would have, especially during rainy days, contaminated a huge area of Japan including Tokyo beyond limits imaginable.
Yet some people still are pro nuclear energy or just believe they'd run out of power if there wasn't any. Sometimes I hear comments that Fukushima didn't have that much impact on life. Those people totally ignore the fact that the weather conditions were just totally lucky for the population. That is nuclear energy safety based on sheer luck. Great.
People must realize that nuclear energy basically is a side effect of the cold war times, when those plants were rather needed for building nuclear weapons. Without all that tax financed research, one kilowatt hour of nuclear energy would cost as much as 500 Yen. It is not cheap. And this calculation doesn't even include the dangerous waste "disposal" for thousands of generations after us.
Security is not the most important thing on nuclear power plants, it's the return on investment. A former neighbor worked as a security engineer at a well known nuclear power plant, I myself worked at a company trying to implement third party inspections on nuclear plants, from what I heard and realized myself is, anything not deemed neccessary by law will not be implemented because of costs. And this is not only the case in Japan.
In recent posts here I tried to calm down panic since there actually was no need for in Tokyo, but recently I hear some voices, including a comment on JT here, that go in the direction of, not so bad here, we must learn from this accident and make it safer for future plants. Yeah right. This technology does not forgive any mistakes, not even mentioning the waste. Nowadays there are many other CO2 neutral ways of making enough energy for also industrialized countries. Germany recently decided to pull out of nuclear energy rather fast, in Austria it is even forbidden by law and many other industrialized countries don't use nuclear energy.
I can only urge everybody, do not follow the voices I mentioned above, that nuclear energy is neccessary, that it can be made safer, that Fukushima is not so bad, etc. A simple error like a failing cooling (there is no earthquake or tsunami neccesary for that, at Forsmark it just happened by a shortcut and still nobody knows why coincidentally again by sheer luck, two emergency pumps restarted itself seconds before meltdown) can destroy the lifes of millions and make whole countries uninhabitable.
Governemnts only learn very slowly, especially when money is involved. Just as one example: Turkey plans to build two nuclear plants in Europes/Asias most dangerous earthquake area, one with the help of.... TEPCO. No wonder people keep calm about it, when your governemnet actually tells you, that radioactive tea tastes better and a little radiation is good for you. (1986 - Turgut Ozal, prime minister and Cahit Aral, trade minister).
0 ( +0 / -0 )